You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Qiaochu_Yuan comments on The idiot savant AI isn't an idiot - Less Wrong Discussion

8 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 18 July 2013 03:43PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (133)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 18 July 2013 10:22:34PM 1 point [-]

Then what basis do you have for thinking that a particular programming task is simple?

Comment author: Carinthium 18 July 2013 10:41:32PM -2 points [-]

A hypothetical AI programmed to run a paperclip factory, as compared to one designed to fulfil the role LessWrong grants Friendly AI, would: -Not need any recursive intelligence enhancement, and probably not need upgrading -Be able to discard massive numbers of functions regarding a lot of understanding of both humans and other matters

Less functions means less to program, which means less chance of glitches or other errors. Without intelligence enhancement the odds of an unfriendly outcome are greatly reduced. Therefore, the odds of a paperclip factory AI becoming a threat to humanity is far smaller than a Friendly AI.

Comment author: RolfAndreassen 19 July 2013 12:57:52AM 2 points [-]

A hypothetical AI programmed to run a paperclip factory

That is not what is meant around here by "paperclip maximiser". A true clippy does not run a factory; it transmutes the total mass of the solar system into paperclips, starting with humans and ending with the computer it runs on. (With the possible exception of some rockets containing enough computing power to repeat the process on other suns.) That is what it means to maximise something.